New York Employment Attorneys Blog

IHOP allegedly fires Muslim employees.The attorney for four former managers working for IHOP, James Vagnini stated: "About a year and a half ago, the rug was pulled underneath simply because of the way their names look, the way they appear, where they come from and the religion they practice," "This is unacceptable in this country in this day and age."

The men worked at franchise restaurants in Fort Worth, Arlington, Plano and Burleson.

After the four employees filed charges with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the EEOC's investigation found that "violations have occurred" at the company.

The plaintiffs allege that their reputations have been damaged and they cannot secure employment. One of the plaintiffs, Joseph Chamseddine, worked for more than a decade at the chain restaurant. He along with the other fired managers would like letters of recommendation from IHOP so that they can secure future employment.

Chamseddine said he feels wronged by the actions of IHOP. "I think what they did to us to me and my managers is unfair, unethical and illegal," he said. If you feel like you have been wronged as a result of religious discrimination and your religious beliefs, contact the Harman Firm.

The EEOC filed a law suit against AutoZone in September 2010, alleging that AutoZone violated federal law when it subjected Frank Mahoney Burroughs, an employee who had converted to the Sikh religion, to harassment and refused to accommodate his religious need to wear a turban.

According to the suit, AutoZone managers at its Massachusetts location harassed Mahoney Burroughs by disparaging his religion, asking if he had joined Al-Qaeda and whether he was a terrorist. Further, the company failed to intervene when customers referred to him as "Bin Laden" and made terrorist jokes. Moreover, AutoZone refused to let Mahoney Burroughs wear a religiously mandated turban and kara (a religious bracelet). Finally, the EEOC alleged that AutoZone terminated him because of his religion and in retaliation for asking for an accommodation and complaining about discrimination.

Such religious discrimination and harassment are all violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which also protects against retaliation against employees who asserts their Title VII rights.

On Jan. 11, Judge William Young decided in favor of the EEOC on its claim that AutoZone had failed to accommodate Mahoney Burroughs' need to wear a turban. The company will pay $75,000 plus attorneys' fees and provide other nationwide relief to settle a discrimination lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the agency announced today. Further, in addition to the monetary relief, the decree requires AutoZone to adopt a policy prohibiting religious discrimination; train its managers and human resource employees on religious discrimination and the new policy; report to the EEOC on its handling of all requests for religious accommodation and complaints of religious harassment; distribute the new policy; and a notice regarding the consent decree to its 65,000 employees in more than 4,500 U.S. stores.

"Employers must be vigilant in watching out for such misconduct and resolute in stopping it if they find it" said Elizabeth Grossman, regional attorney for the EEOC's New York District Office. If you have any complaints of religious discrimination or harassment, you can contact the Harman Firm.

The American Civil Liberties Union ("ACLU") brought suit against the Chesterfield School District on behalf of one of its students for unconstitutionally promoting religion. Specifically, the District held a prayer rally at a school assembly and prayers at official events.

The ACLU acted on behalf of a middle-school atheist student who did not agree with the Christian activities, such as the evangelical assembly, at school. Moreover, this student was pressured into attending religious events - for instance he was given the choice of attending a religious concert or being sent to the suspension-room. Such treatment hinders students' freedom of religion and may even be considered religious discrimination.

The ACLU and the Chesterfield School District finally agreed to settle the suit. In the consent decree and order, the Chesterfield County schools admitted they had violated the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution which mandates separation of church and state. The official outcome of the case prohibits school officials from promoting religion and encouraging prayers at events and was made final on Thursday, January 26, 2012, by a federal judge.

Follow the story as it develops here.

Abercrombie & Fitch prides itself on being a trendy brand focused on image. Its management attaches great importance to marketing policy regulating Sales associates' and employees' looks and outfits.

A 20 year-old college student and practicing Muslim, Hani Khan is a former employee of Abercrombie & Fitch. She wore a hijab while at work in an Hollister shop, a subsidiary of A&F. According to Ms. Khan, a manager first informed her that if she was going to wear a hijab, she needed to wear one that matched store colors. If she did not, she would be in violation of the store's "look policy."

Ms. Khan complied with the store's policy and carefully picked a hijab that matched store colors. But, a few months later, a visiting district manager allegedly told Ms. Khan to speak with a Human Resources manager who then requested her to remove the head scarf while she was at work. Because of her religious convictions, Ms. Khan declined the request and was then dismissed from the company.

The EEOC filed an employment lawsuit on behalf of Ms. Khan in California alleging a religious discrimination.

Just in time for the holiday season comes a lawsuit filed in New York Supreme Court. A Roman Catholic employee has come forward alleging that as a sales executive for a Midtown watch company was barred from wearing a cross in the work place.

The employee, Jamie Errico, claims that she was scolded for wearing the cross in the office place and was told "adamantly" that she should never wear the cross again. The lawsuit further states that the other Jewish employees were allowed to wear yarmulkes and Star's of David, and were allowed to routinely meet for prayers.

Further, the suit claims that non-Jewish employees were docked for taking off time on Christmas eve, while Jewish employees were routinely given time off whenever needed on the eve of holidays.

This holiday season, we want to remind employees and employers that religious discrimination is not only just wrong, it is illegal. Employers should take careful steps to maintain order and respect in the workplace, creating an environment where all employees are treated fairly and within the law.